Talk:Autodesk Maya

External Link

Please Add these useful link to external links -

CGIndia New, Maya Scripts, tutorials, Free 3d Models and Textures!
AREA Autodesk's Official CG Portal for 3ds max and maya !

--Wiki187 16:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think the CGIndia site is relevant enough, EL and SPAM issues aside. AREA is far less questionable, but I'm still for keeping it off since it's a portal rather than a specific article or resource. --Ronz 20:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RonZ - please explain "relevant" ???

And let me tell you something about the point of view from the users side, I am least interested in knowing your 5 pillars etc.... but the link I suggested was totally relevant.....Beside using your moderation power and your pride,… Consider logic and common sense as your first tool......The both the link ( CGIndia and AutoDesk’s “AREA”) are relevant for following specified section - visual effects (VFX), Computer Graphics , Maya (software), 3ds Max.....You may invite Wiki users for voting and host a poll :) ..........................May Be some1 above you look into your matter.....Please stop repeating or may i say pasting same old comments on every once post. --Wiki187 11:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The burden is on you is to demonstrate the value of your edits. Also, your personal attacks against me are not appreciated. --Ronz 15:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Ronz on this one. The CGIndia link is just not relevant enough. It is not Maya-specific. There are dozens of websites that provide content similar to that one. I don't see why it merits a link from the Maya page, unless you want to see screenfulls of links here. The Area is more relevant I agree... Martinpw 20:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Film B‑class

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Bias?

The "Select Features" section sounds like an advertisment, in name and content

Kingoomieiii 15:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I swear--It's like reading the back of the box... If no one wants to improve and expound on it, it would probably best be deleted. --DMAJohnson 17:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire article sounds like an advertisement.

And I'd have to say, no encyclopedia writer would repeatedly refer to the product as "Alias(R) Maya(R), Alias(R) Maya(R), Alias(R) Maya(R)..." A Pattern O 18:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

Here's the kind of thing I think needs cleaning up (I didn't add the tag though).

Forward Kinematics: The reverse of Inverse Kinematics.
Inverse Kinematics: The reverse of Forward Kinematics.
Lighting: In the real world, when light shines on a surface, the parts of the surface facing toward the light source appear illuminated, and the parts of the surface facing away from the light source appear dark. If one object is located between a second object and the light source, the first object casts a shadow onto the second object.

These are some of the most pointless examples, but much of the article seems to be nothing more than an enumeration of features with a brief description of each. I don't think so much detail is of general interest and many of the features listed aren't Maya-specific so don't deserve more than a pasing mention. I think most of it could be condensed to a couple of paragraphs (Maya offers the usual features of 3D modelling programs, such as x,y,z and [ is notable for / is unique in / pioneered ] support of a,b,c). Is all this chaff the result of expansion of the "Select Features" as suggested above under Bias? --Mollymoo 15:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses 'you' a lot; second-person instructions are not encyclopedic. Also, the paragraph in the scripting section is very poor. The example is too specific, and would confuse many readers; and the inclusion of script macros on toolbars is explained too verbosely.--Jeffro77 01:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The definitions of FK and IK sort of remind me of that classic definition of recursion:

Recursion: noun. See recursion

(Sorry, couldn't resist...) - Skaraoke 07:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the descriptions of the modelling features (NURBS details, etc) but forgot to set the description, so I thought I'd post a note here since it was reduced to one sentence. 4.242.132.95 21: 06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Maya this, Maya that...

Anyone else annoyed at the amount of times a sentence starts with Maya? Yes, the article is about Maya, we don't have to refer to it every single time; we know it's about Maya.

-G

Clean-up tag?

I think this article is awful. Combined with what's been said above (particularly the 'Maya this, Maya that' and the other 'clean-up' heading), this article contains lots of buzzwords (already tagged), and most of it appears to be copy-and-paste (especially where it refers you to somewhere that isn't in the article). I've found a few places with incorrect grammar as well.

Should this article be flagged? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marshmello (talk • contribs) 21:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I don't really know how editing works but I just wanted to point out that this article is awful, one of the worst I've ever read. As someone who knows nothing about Maya I think I can deliver an outsider viewpoint here. My suggestion is to just delete the Scripting and Plugins section as well as the Official Maya Learning Tool sections. The Modeling section at least contains some useful details but it should be a couple of paragraphs at most instead of a list of features. Generally I found it useful to know that Maya has a lot of built-in tools to perform otherwise complicated and lengthy tasks such as animating water or hair or whatever. I could really do without having to read through a bunch of crap about Native Mental Ray Renderers. The entire Modeling section reads like I imagine the Maya manual would and I agree completely that it seems to have been copy-and-pasted from somewhere. It's absolutely terrible, it really is. I've been reading articles on Wikipedia for about two years now and this is the first time I've felt the need to comment.

Stop argueing...

If you dont like this software please stop. -JM

south park

should it be referenced somewhere that south park is made with this program? Shadowcelibi 16:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why? - Skaraoke 07:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The best location for the reference were to be in the south park article itself. --194.247.234.182 15:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]